|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 31 2025 22:58 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 22:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 22:38 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:18 Sadist wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? Yes id like them all explained Certainly: People with hearing disability could have trouble hearing conversations clearly on a radio. On multiple frequencies. Of multiple conversations happening at once. With their supervisor in the background and also needing to talk with colleagues when necessary. They could have trouble interpreting the various accents of pilots, not limited to those whose first language isn't English. People with vision disability could have trouble tracking things (people with dyslexia can confuse similar callsigns, waypoints, etc. leading to confusing -> dangerous situations - I've put dyslexia here as not an intellectual disability). Missing extremities is vague but you probably can't operate computers and equipment without working fingers. I'd let toes and feet slide on this one. Partial paralysis is the same - there are certain critical body parts, like fingers, mouth, vocal cords, eyes, that need to work. Complete paralysis obviously includes all of those. Epilepsy - You do not want people seizing in the middle of controlling airplanes. Sometimes a controller is the only one working a tower. That's a problem by itself, but you also can't fix this by personnel redundancy - If you have one guy who is epileptic, so you put another in case he seizes, in the event he seizes his partner is now helping him instead of directing planes. Or splitting attention. Or he can't take a bathroom break because of the risk. People with intellectual disability cannot direct airplanes. People with psychiatric disability are equally unable to direct airplanes, either all the time or in the event of an episode, which is not a risk to be taken. People with dwarfism cannot see out of the window in cases where it's necessary to directly visually interact with something, e.g. planes on the runway or taxiway, a runway incursion by a streaker, a plane doing a flyby to confirm their gear is down, etc. While it's true that a perfectly healthy person can have a heart attack and die also, potentially causing a dangerous situation, you can't proscribe perfectly healthy people on the assumption their risk is nonzero, because nobody is left to do the job. There have been cases of lone controllers having strokes on the job with no history. Not good. However, it's pretty much recognized internationally in cases of bus drivers, airplane pilots, that basically all of these factors are disqualifying. For basic reasons of safety. For similar reasons making them ATC is not very viable. The main criticism that works is there's no sources, so we don't know if it was made up, or a misunderstanding of FAA hiring in general vs. ATC in particular, or if it's completely true. However, if true hopefully you can see the issue of the FAA prioritizing quite the wrong things. We do know the class action lawsuits are in progress accusing them of the same behavior. The investigation of this particular incident notwithstanding, many of the FAA's policies range from headscratchers to negligence. Is there any evidence that any of the above disabilities caused - or even contributed to - the mid-air crash between the plane and helicopter? Any evidence of either me or Donald "We do not know what led to this crash" Blumpf claiming that, my friend?
A simple "No" would suffice 
|
On January 31 2025 23:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 22:58 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:39 WombaT wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? As I already said, from what I understand these were guidelines across the board for FAA employees/employment focus and not necessarily specific to air traffic controllers who may have a different standard, and if that wasn’t the case I’m open to correction. But you’re not interested in digging into the truth of whatever matter is on the table, but facetiously defending everything the Dear Leader does and gaslighting everyone else for observing basic reality. Reality is crash this weekend or not, there's been a known increase in close calls basically since the reopening after covid. That's Biden and Buttigieg. Reasonable to assess the FAA's role in that since over the past 4 years they were under the auspices of the Department of Transportation during the time of a far less dear leader. Close calls are when planes don't actually hit each other and kill a bunch of people though, right?
If two companies make rockets that have a 20% chance of blowing up, and on the first launches they don't blow up, and then one of the companies spends all their time making birthday cakes and playing nerf in the office, and the second company instead makes their rocket twice as safe, but on the second flights theirs blows up and the first company's rocket doesn't, the first company's rocket isn't safer just because they were lucky.
|
On January 31 2025 23:05 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 23:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 22:58 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:39 WombaT wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? As I already said, from what I understand these were guidelines across the board for FAA employees/employment focus and not necessarily specific to air traffic controllers who may have a different standard, and if that wasn’t the case I’m open to correction. But you’re not interested in digging into the truth of whatever matter is on the table, but facetiously defending everything the Dear Leader does and gaslighting everyone else for observing basic reality. Reality is crash this weekend or not, there's been a known increase in close calls basically since the reopening after covid. That's Biden and Buttigieg. Reasonable to assess the FAA's role in that since over the past 4 years they were under the auspices of the Department of Transportation during the time of a far less dear leader. Close calls are when planes don't actually hit each other and kill a bunch of people though, right? If two companies make rockets that have a 20% chance of blowing up, and on the first launches they don't blow up, and then one of the companies spends all their time making birthday cakes and playing nerf in the office, and the second company instead makes their rocket twice as safe, but on the second flights theirs blows up and the first company's rocket doesn't, the first company's rocket isn't safer just because they were lucky.
There have been tens of millions of flights over the past few years. I think that's a pretty large enough sample size to say that these planes aren't just getting "lucky" by not colliding. Don't blame "Biden and Buttigieg" for something that happened under Trump's watch, or else you might as well just say "Thanks Obama" too.
|
Are you claiming adjustable chairs don't exist?
Trump isn't a Nazi. He's an Anti-multiculturalist. I think you just have to give it a new name to go with the times. To be hip, as they say.
|
On January 31 2025 22:38 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 22:18 Sadist wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? Yes id like them all explained Certainly: People with hearing disability could have trouble hearing conversations clearly on a radio. On multiple frequencies. Of multiple conversations happening at once. With their supervisor in the background and also needing to talk with colleagues when necessary. They could have trouble interpreting the various accents of pilots, not limited to those whose first language isn't English. People with vision disability could have trouble tracking things (people with dyslexia can confuse similar callsigns, waypoints, etc. leading to confusing -> dangerous situations - I've put dyslexia here as not an intellectual disability). Missing extremities is vague but you probably can't operate computers and equipment without working fingers. I'd let toes and feet slide on this one. Partial paralysis is the same - there are certain critical body parts, like fingers, mouth, vocal cords, eyes, that need to work. Complete paralysis obviously includes all of those. Epilepsy - You do not want people seizing in the middle of controlling airplanes. Sometimes a controller is the only one working a tower. That's a problem by itself, but you also can't fix this by personnel redundancy - If you have one guy who is epileptic, so you put another in case he seizes, in the event he seizes his partner is now helping him instead of directing planes. Or splitting attention. Or he can't take a bathroom break because of the risk. People with intellectual disability cannot direct airplanes. People with psychiatric disability are equally unable to direct airplanes, either all the time or in the event of an episode, which is not a risk to be taken. People with dwarfism cannot see out of the window in cases where it's necessary to directly visually interact with something, e.g. planes on the runway or taxiway, a runway incursion by a streaker, a plane doing a flyby to confirm their gear is down, etc. While it's true that a perfectly healthy person can have a heart attack and die also, potentially causing a dangerous situation, you can't proscribe perfectly healthy people on the assumption their risk is nonzero, because nobody is left to do the job. There have been cases of lone controllers having strokes on the job with no history. Not good. However, it's pretty much recognized internationally in cases of bus drivers, airplane pilots, that basically all of these factors are disqualifying. For basic reasons of safety. For similar reasons making them ATC is not very viable. The main criticism that works is there's no sources, so we don't know if it was made up, or a misunderstanding of FAA hiring in general vs. ATC in particular, or if it's completely true. However, if true hopefully you can see the issue of the FAA prioritizing quite the wrong things. We do know the class action lawsuits are in progress accusing them of the same behavior. The investigation of this particular incident notwithstanding, many of the FAA's policies range from headscratchers to negligence.
This post is so fucking funny.
You can't even be older than 56 as an ATC according to the FAA.
You seriously think someone with the above disabilities would ever be accepted, let alone pass the education?
Completly healthy individuals with no psychological problems often can't handle it because you need a very specific type of person to handle the job. Even people who excell in training can burn out from the long term stress.
I know a lady who worked as a pilot and an ATC in the US (long time ago but still). I seriously think she can't feel stress.
If anything with the ACT shortage in the US (and globally) you might be hiring normal people instead of the right kind but that's a resource problem and not an DEI one.
|
Whether trump is a nazi or not is not important. He has tendencies and there are definately Nazi or Nazi adjacent people in his inner circle.
|
On January 31 2025 23:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 23:05 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 23:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 22:58 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:39 WombaT wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? As I already said, from what I understand these were guidelines across the board for FAA employees/employment focus and not necessarily specific to air traffic controllers who may have a different standard, and if that wasn’t the case I’m open to correction. But you’re not interested in digging into the truth of whatever matter is on the table, but facetiously defending everything the Dear Leader does and gaslighting everyone else for observing basic reality. Reality is crash this weekend or not, there's been a known increase in close calls basically since the reopening after covid. That's Biden and Buttigieg. Reasonable to assess the FAA's role in that since over the past 4 years they were under the auspices of the Department of Transportation during the time of a far less dear leader. Close calls are when planes don't actually hit each other and kill a bunch of people though, right? If two companies make rockets that have a 20% chance of blowing up, and on the first launches they don't blow up, and then one of the companies spends all their time making birthday cakes and playing nerf in the office, and the second company instead makes their rocket twice as safe, but on the second flights theirs blows up and the first company's rocket doesn't, the first company's rocket isn't safer just because they were lucky. There have been tens of millions of flights over the past few years. I think that's a pretty large enough sample size to say that these planes aren't just getting "lucky" by not colliding. Don't blame "Biden and Buttigieg" for something that happened under Trump's watch, or else you might as well just say "Thanks Obama" too.
You're right as always my esteemed colleague. I was mistaken. The well-documented increase in ATC close calls that the government itself acknowledged two years ago (which I'm sure you didn't miss because it wasn't in your news cycle) actually makes us safer. Any idiot can keep planes nowhere near each other. But it takes a real precision micro genius to repeatedly bring them so close together that it activates the TCAS system, or to almost land planes into each other on the same runway, or to almost crash them into each other on intersecting runways. Sometimes the ATC is so skilled that they are actually able to leave it to the intervention of a fellow pilot to avoid the close call - or rather - to create the close call and avoid the tragedy. This is a unique trait that Buttigieg's management culture brought to the FAA and I was wrong not to appreciate it.
|
On January 31 2025 23:10 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 22:38 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:18 Sadist wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? Yes id like them all explained Certainly: People with hearing disability could have trouble hearing conversations clearly on a radio. On multiple frequencies. Of multiple conversations happening at once. With their supervisor in the background and also needing to talk with colleagues when necessary. They could have trouble interpreting the various accents of pilots, not limited to those whose first language isn't English. People with vision disability could have trouble tracking things (people with dyslexia can confuse similar callsigns, waypoints, etc. leading to confusing -> dangerous situations - I've put dyslexia here as not an intellectual disability). Missing extremities is vague but you probably can't operate computers and equipment without working fingers. I'd let toes and feet slide on this one. Partial paralysis is the same - there are certain critical body parts, like fingers, mouth, vocal cords, eyes, that need to work. Complete paralysis obviously includes all of those. Epilepsy - You do not want people seizing in the middle of controlling airplanes. Sometimes a controller is the only one working a tower. That's a problem by itself, but you also can't fix this by personnel redundancy - If you have one guy who is epileptic, so you put another in case he seizes, in the event he seizes his partner is now helping him instead of directing planes. Or splitting attention. Or he can't take a bathroom break because of the risk. People with intellectual disability cannot direct airplanes. People with psychiatric disability are equally unable to direct airplanes, either all the time or in the event of an episode, which is not a risk to be taken. People with dwarfism cannot see out of the window in cases where it's necessary to directly visually interact with something, e.g. planes on the runway or taxiway, a runway incursion by a streaker, a plane doing a flyby to confirm their gear is down, etc. While it's true that a perfectly healthy person can have a heart attack and die also, potentially causing a dangerous situation, you can't proscribe perfectly healthy people on the assumption their risk is nonzero, because nobody is left to do the job. There have been cases of lone controllers having strokes on the job with no history. Not good. However, it's pretty much recognized internationally in cases of bus drivers, airplane pilots, that basically all of these factors are disqualifying. For basic reasons of safety. For similar reasons making them ATC is not very viable. The main criticism that works is there's no sources, so we don't know if it was made up, or a misunderstanding of FAA hiring in general vs. ATC in particular, or if it's completely true. However, if true hopefully you can see the issue of the FAA prioritizing quite the wrong things. We do know the class action lawsuits are in progress accusing them of the same behavior. The investigation of this particular incident notwithstanding, many of the FAA's policies range from headscratchers to negligence. This post is so fucking funny. You can't even be older than 56 as an ATC according to the FAA. You seriously think someone with the above disabilities would ever be accepted, let alone pass the education? Completly healthy individuals with no psychological problems often can't handle it because you need a very specific type of person to handle the job. Even people who excell in training can burn out from the long term stress. I know a lady who worked as a pilot and an ATC in the US (long time ago but still). I seriously think she can't feel stress. If anything with the ACT shortage in the US (and globally) you might be hiring normal people instead of the right kind but that's a resource problem and not an DEI one.
This topic definitely has the same "I'm just asking questions" bullshit vibe that Trump had during the Obama birther conspiracy: Do we actually know where all the women, people of color, gay people, trans people, and people with epilepsy and/or partial paralysis and/or dwarfism were, when the plane and helicopter collided? Just to be, ya know, thorough?
|
On January 31 2025 23:24 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 23:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 23:05 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 23:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 22:58 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:39 WombaT wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? As I already said, from what I understand these were guidelines across the board for FAA employees/employment focus and not necessarily specific to air traffic controllers who may have a different standard, and if that wasn’t the case I’m open to correction. But you’re not interested in digging into the truth of whatever matter is on the table, but facetiously defending everything the Dear Leader does and gaslighting everyone else for observing basic reality. Reality is crash this weekend or not, there's been a known increase in close calls basically since the reopening after covid. That's Biden and Buttigieg. Reasonable to assess the FAA's role in that since over the past 4 years they were under the auspices of the Department of Transportation during the time of a far less dear leader. Close calls are when planes don't actually hit each other and kill a bunch of people though, right? If two companies make rockets that have a 20% chance of blowing up, and on the first launches they don't blow up, and then one of the companies spends all their time making birthday cakes and playing nerf in the office, and the second company instead makes their rocket twice as safe, but on the second flights theirs blows up and the first company's rocket doesn't, the first company's rocket isn't safer just because they were lucky. There have been tens of millions of flights over the past few years. I think that's a pretty large enough sample size to say that these planes aren't just getting "lucky" by not colliding. Don't blame "Biden and Buttigieg" for something that happened under Trump's watch, or else you might as well just say "Thanks Obama" too. You're right as always my esteemed colleague. I was mistaken. The well-documented increase in ATC close calls that the government itself acknowledged two years ago (which I'm sure you didn't miss because it wasn't in your news cycle) actually makes us safer. Any idiot can keep planes nowhere near each other. But it takes a real precision micro genius to repeatedly bring them so close together that it activates the TCAS system, or to almost land planes into each other on the same runway, or to almost crash them into each other on intersecting runways. Sometimes the ATC is so skilled that they are actually able to leave it to the intervention of a fellow pilot to avoid the close call - or rather - to create the close call and avoid the tragedy. This is a unique trait that Buttigieg's management culture brought to the FAA and I was wrong not to appreciate it.
So, again, not crashing and killing people. I guarantee you that if Trump found out about close calls increasing over time, he would proudly claim that he's going to "stop close calls from ever happening again" by just telling pilots to actually crash their planes into each other if they ever almost have a close call. That's the kind of spin he loves.
|
Ya'll, this accident is not political.
Trump made other people's tragedy about himself, as he always does -- and yet, it's still not political. We're just filling his daily me-myself-and-I-quota. This is just feeding the chief narcissist's desperate desire for attention and nothing more.
This whole discussion has been fabricated out of nothing.
Trump's bootlickers love to see you all waste your energy on this. Please don't fall for the grift.
|
Northern Ireland23732 Posts
It’s the usual disingenuous bullshit that isn’t really worth entertaining, one will be subjected to (hopefully) ineffective gaslighting and an almost 0% chance of shifting opinions.
We’ve been headbutting that wall since 2016 to little real effect.
Whether it takes the form of ‘revolutionary socialism’ or not, GH is 100% correct that winning internet arguments with Fascist-enablers does shit all, and building up robust community efforts is the way to go.
|
On January 31 2025 23:47 WombaT wrote:
It’s the usual disingenuous bullshit that isn’t really worth entertaining, one will be subjected to (hopefully) ineffective gaslighting and an almost 0% chance of shifting opinions.
We’ve been headbutting that wall since 2016 to little real effect.
Whether it takes the form of ‘revolutionary socialism’ or not, GH is 100% correct that winning internet arguments with Fascist-enablers does shit all, and building up robust community efforts is the way to go.
So we just have to ban Blackjack and oBlade. Because that's the only way your going to stop this from not happening constantly for the next 4 years.
|
On February 01 2025 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 23:47 WombaT wrote:
It’s the usual disingenuous bullshit that isn’t really worth entertaining, one will be subjected to (hopefully) ineffective gaslighting and an almost 0% chance of shifting opinions.
We’ve been headbutting that wall since 2016 to little real effect.
Whether it takes the form of ‘revolutionary socialism’ or not, GH is 100% correct that winning internet arguments with Fascist-enablers does shit all, and building up robust community efforts is the way to go.
So we just have to ban Blackjack and oBlade. Because that's the only way your going to stop this from not happening constantly for the next 4 years.
BlackJack has some hang-ups about he perceives as 'woke culture' but I've never seen him defending rapes, or writing great replacement theory, or gaslighting about every single thing Trump & co do. As a recent example, he instantly called out the Musk Nazi salute for what it was. It bothers me when people lump him with oBlade, they're galaxies apart.
|
On February 01 2025 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 23:47 WombaT wrote:
It’s the usual disingenuous bullshit that isn’t really worth entertaining, one will be subjected to (hopefully) ineffective gaslighting and an almost 0% chance of shifting opinions.
We’ve been headbutting that wall since 2016 to little real effect.
Whether it takes the form of ‘revolutionary socialism’ or not, GH is 100% correct that winning internet arguments with Fascist-enablers does shit all, and building up robust community efforts is the way to go.
So we just have to ban Blackjack and oBlade. Because that's the only way your going to stop this from not happening constantly for the next 4 years.
Admittedly it's often not easy to ignore, but I can say that I carry a little bit less negative energy in myself through the day when I have the discipline to avoid pointless topics such as this one.
I've also stopped responding to certain individuals for many months (before I finally cave one time and then have to tell myself to never respond).
|
Y'all gotta try the Not-Engaging-With-People tactic, let me tell you it makes my time in this thread 10x more tolerable. Why spend your energy on people who have proven over multiple years that they're basically brick walls? I never understand what people are gaining from doing a back and forth with any of the myriad posters in this thread's history that just seem to be Debate Lord types with no real beliefs or interest in anything beyond owning the libs or whatever.
|
On January 31 2025 23:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 23:24 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 23:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 23:05 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 23:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 22:58 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:39 WombaT wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:
Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs.
[quote]
It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? As I already said, from what I understand these were guidelines across the board for FAA employees/employment focus and not necessarily specific to air traffic controllers who may have a different standard, and if that wasn’t the case I’m open to correction. But you’re not interested in digging into the truth of whatever matter is on the table, but facetiously defending everything the Dear Leader does and gaslighting everyone else for observing basic reality. Reality is crash this weekend or not, there's been a known increase in close calls basically since the reopening after covid. That's Biden and Buttigieg. Reasonable to assess the FAA's role in that since over the past 4 years they were under the auspices of the Department of Transportation during the time of a far less dear leader. Close calls are when planes don't actually hit each other and kill a bunch of people though, right? If two companies make rockets that have a 20% chance of blowing up, and on the first launches they don't blow up, and then one of the companies spends all their time making birthday cakes and playing nerf in the office, and the second company instead makes their rocket twice as safe, but on the second flights theirs blows up and the first company's rocket doesn't, the first company's rocket isn't safer just because they were lucky. There have been tens of millions of flights over the past few years. I think that's a pretty large enough sample size to say that these planes aren't just getting "lucky" by not colliding. Don't blame "Biden and Buttigieg" for something that happened under Trump's watch, or else you might as well just say "Thanks Obama" too. You're right as always my esteemed colleague. I was mistaken. The well-documented increase in ATC close calls that the government itself acknowledged two years ago (which I'm sure you didn't miss because it wasn't in your news cycle) actually makes us safer. Any idiot can keep planes nowhere near each other. But it takes a real precision micro genius to repeatedly bring them so close together that it activates the TCAS system, or to almost land planes into each other on the same runway, or to almost crash them into each other on intersecting runways. Sometimes the ATC is so skilled that they are actually able to leave it to the intervention of a fellow pilot to avoid the close call - or rather - to create the close call and avoid the tragedy. This is a unique trait that Buttigieg's management culture brought to the FAA and I was wrong not to appreciate it. So, again, not crashing and killing people. I guarantee you that if Trump found out about close calls increasing over time, he would proudly claim that he's going to "stop close calls from ever happening again" by just telling pilots to actually crash their planes into each other if they ever almost have a close call. That's the kind of spin he loves.
If close calls were increasing because actual crashes were decreasing, that would be a good substitution effect. It would still represent non-ideal risk over fewer or no close calls.
Close calls increased in a period with no fatal crashes anyway, over their own base rate. That is an objective problem.
|
On February 01 2025 00:33 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 23:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 23:24 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 23:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 23:05 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 23:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 31 2025 22:58 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 22:39 WombaT wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]
I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? As I already said, from what I understand these were guidelines across the board for FAA employees/employment focus and not necessarily specific to air traffic controllers who may have a different standard, and if that wasn’t the case I’m open to correction. But you’re not interested in digging into the truth of whatever matter is on the table, but facetiously defending everything the Dear Leader does and gaslighting everyone else for observing basic reality. Reality is crash this weekend or not, there's been a known increase in close calls basically since the reopening after covid. That's Biden and Buttigieg. Reasonable to assess the FAA's role in that since over the past 4 years they were under the auspices of the Department of Transportation during the time of a far less dear leader. Close calls are when planes don't actually hit each other and kill a bunch of people though, right? If two companies make rockets that have a 20% chance of blowing up, and on the first launches they don't blow up, and then one of the companies spends all their time making birthday cakes and playing nerf in the office, and the second company instead makes their rocket twice as safe, but on the second flights theirs blows up and the first company's rocket doesn't, the first company's rocket isn't safer just because they were lucky. There have been tens of millions of flights over the past few years. I think that's a pretty large enough sample size to say that these planes aren't just getting "lucky" by not colliding. Don't blame "Biden and Buttigieg" for something that happened under Trump's watch, or else you might as well just say "Thanks Obama" too. You're right as always my esteemed colleague. I was mistaken. The well-documented increase in ATC close calls that the government itself acknowledged two years ago (which I'm sure you didn't miss because it wasn't in your news cycle) actually makes us safer. Any idiot can keep planes nowhere near each other. But it takes a real precision micro genius to repeatedly bring them so close together that it activates the TCAS system, or to almost land planes into each other on the same runway, or to almost crash them into each other on intersecting runways. Sometimes the ATC is so skilled that they are actually able to leave it to the intervention of a fellow pilot to avoid the close call - or rather - to create the close call and avoid the tragedy. This is a unique trait that Buttigieg's management culture brought to the FAA and I was wrong not to appreciate it. So, again, not crashing and killing people. I guarantee you that if Trump found out about close calls increasing over time, he would proudly claim that he's going to "stop close calls from ever happening again" by just telling pilots to actually crash their planes into each other if they ever almost have a close call. That's the kind of spin he loves. If close calls were increasing because actual crashes were decreasing, that would be a good substitution effect. It would still represent non-ideal risk over fewer or no close calls. Close calls increased in a period with no fatal crashes anyway, over their own base rate. That is an objective problem.
What if there were more close calls because you can fit more Dwarfs in the same spaces and they can use smaller planes. Therefore the aircontrol-dwarfs saw acceptable distances as closer?
These darn Dwarfs. I also hear they have trouble understanding foreign accents...
|
United States41934 Posts
On January 31 2025 22:38 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2025 22:18 Sadist wrote:On January 31 2025 21:54 oBlade wrote:On January 31 2025 20:56 EnDeR_ wrote:On January 31 2025 12:00 KwarK wrote:Trump blamed the aerial collision on, among other things, dwarfs. We do not know what led to this crash but we have some very strong opinions and ideas.
….
The FAA website states they include hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability and dwarfism all qualified for the position of a controller of air planes pouring into our country, pouring into a little spot. A little dot on the map. A runway. It’s not currently clear why the dwarfs crashed the plane or what their agenda is but there’s one thing that is clear, DEI is to blame. I'm a bit curious about the "this is actually what Trump meant" take that we usually get here after statements like these. You see the problem with hiring controllers from all the other groups mentioned, but you agree dwarfism is over the line so you're singling it out? Or do you need each and every one of them explained? Yes id like them all explained Certainly: People with hearing disability could have trouble hearing conversations clearly on a radio. On multiple frequencies. Of multiple conversations happening at once. With their supervisor in the background and also needing to talk with colleagues when necessary. They could have trouble interpreting the various accents of pilots, not limited to those whose first language isn't English. People with vision disability could have trouble tracking things (people with dyslexia can confuse similar callsigns, waypoints, etc. leading to confusing -> dangerous situations - I've put dyslexia here as not an intellectual disability). Missing extremities is vague but you probably can't operate computers and equipment without working fingers. I'd let toes and feet slide on this one. Partial paralysis is the same - there are certain critical body parts, like fingers, mouth, vocal cords, eyes, that need to work. Complete paralysis obviously includes all of those. Epilepsy - You do not want people seizing in the middle of controlling airplanes. Sometimes a controller is the only one working a tower. That's a problem by itself, but you also can't fix this by personnel redundancy - If you have one guy who is epileptic, so you put another in case he seizes, in the event he seizes his partner is now helping him instead of directing planes. Or splitting attention. Or he can't take a bathroom break because of the risk. People with intellectual disability cannot direct airplanes. People with psychiatric disability are equally unable to direct airplanes, either all the time or in the event of an episode, which is not a risk to be taken. People with dwarfism cannot see out of the window in cases where it's necessary to directly visually interact with something, e.g. planes on the runway or taxiway, a runway incursion by a streaker, a plane doing a flyby to confirm their gear is down, etc. While it's true that a perfectly healthy person can have a heart attack and die also, potentially causing a dangerous situation, you can't proscribe perfectly healthy people on the assumption their risk is nonzero, because nobody is left to do the job. There have been cases of lone controllers having strokes on the job with no history. Not good. However, it's pretty much recognized internationally in cases of bus drivers, airplane pilots, that basically all of these factors are disqualifying. For basic reasons of safety. For similar reasons making them ATC is not very viable. The main criticism that works is there's no sources, so we don't know if it was made up, or a misunderstanding of FAA hiring in general vs. ATC in particular, or if it's completely true. However, if true hopefully you can see the issue of the FAA prioritizing quite the wrong things. We do know the class action lawsuits are in progress accusing them of the same behavior. The investigation of this particular incident notwithstanding, many of the FAA's policies range from headscratchers to negligence.
I'm pretty sure that there's more to air traffic control than they literally look at the plane out of the window. The scenario where the window is too high and the plane is too low and you can't see the plane doesn't align with my understanding of how they track the positions of objects in the sky. If that were the process then clouds or night would be a bigger issue than dwarfism as dwarfism could be solved with a stepstool. I also don't think Biden was plotting to staff it exclusively with amputee dwarfs, surely there are some dwarf friendly roles.
But clearly you're having fun with these scenarios so I'll join in. We should ban cis men from ATC jobs. Like what if they're trying to direct the plane but they get distracted by their penises? What if they fall in the urinals in the bathroom? While it's true that we need some ATCs I don't see why we'd accept this entirely avoidable risk. I don't know any facts about the subject but what I do have is some very strong ideas.
|
On February 01 2025 00:20 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2025 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On January 31 2025 23:47 WombaT wrote:
It’s the usual disingenuous bullshit that isn’t really worth entertaining, one will be subjected to (hopefully) ineffective gaslighting and an almost 0% chance of shifting opinions.
We’ve been headbutting that wall since 2016 to little real effect.
Whether it takes the form of ‘revolutionary socialism’ or not, GH is 100% correct that winning internet arguments with Fascist-enablers does shit all, and building up robust community efforts is the way to go.
So we just have to ban Blackjack and oBlade. Because that's the only way your going to stop this from not happening constantly for the next 4 years. Admittedly it's often not easy to ignore, but I can say that I carry a little bit less negative energy in myself through the day when I have the discipline to avoid pointless topics such as this one. I've also stopped responding to certain individuals for many months (before I finally cave one time and then have to tell myself to never respond).
It's funny because most posters can mostly ignore criticism/discussion from their left but we know they can't help themselves when it comes to stuff like spending pages shitposting about ATC dwarfs with oBlade.
It's even worse right now since Democrats functionally have no leadership or message that Trump and his ilk are distracting the country from. So they literally end up asking for it.
|
United States41934 Posts
On February 01 2025 00:51 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2025 00:20 Magic Powers wrote:On February 01 2025 00:00 Gorsameth wrote:On January 31 2025 23:47 WombaT wrote:
It’s the usual disingenuous bullshit that isn’t really worth entertaining, one will be subjected to (hopefully) ineffective gaslighting and an almost 0% chance of shifting opinions.
We’ve been headbutting that wall since 2016 to little real effect.
Whether it takes the form of ‘revolutionary socialism’ or not, GH is 100% correct that winning internet arguments with Fascist-enablers does shit all, and building up robust community efforts is the way to go.
So we just have to ban Blackjack and oBlade. Because that's the only way your going to stop this from not happening constantly for the next 4 years. Admittedly it's often not easy to ignore, but I can say that I carry a little bit less negative energy in myself through the day when I have the discipline to avoid pointless topics such as this one. I've also stopped responding to certain individuals for many months (before I finally cave one time and then have to tell myself to never respond). It's funny because most posters can mostly ignore criticism/discussion from their left but we know they can't help themselves when it comes to stuff like spending pages shitposting about ATC dwarfs with oBlade. It's even worse right now since Democrats functionally have no leadership or message that Trump and his ilk are distracting the country from. So they literally end up asking for it.
Ah yes, Sadist asking Oblade to defend the latest idiotic thing Trump said on teamliquid is why you're still 0 for 0 on revolutions. He should do better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
